TiP is misunderstood – perhaps DDQ is Better

I spent a long time talking to folks about the merits of a conscientious Testing in Production (TiP) strategy.  But I knew TiP had a bad rap.  I even shared the story of how some would mischaracterize it as a common and costly technical malpractice

While evangelizing TiP, I and my Microsoft colleagues would happily post this picture wherever we could

imageYet I knew the original poster was not so enthused with TiP.   Comments on TiP were supposing this was not a conscientious and risk-mitigated strategy, but instead devs behaving badly:

Then blame all issues on QA -_-

That’s our motto here. Doesn’t work to well in practice, actually.

Now I have returned to Amazon after spending 6 years at Microsoft.  From the following it looks like I have some education to do.

image

On the other hand, who can argue with Data-Driven Quality (DDQ).  (Except maybe a HiPPO).  DDQ is also more expansive than TiP, leveraging all data streams whether from production, customer research, or pre-release engineering.  So TiP was fun, but DDQ is the future.

Tags: , ,

2 Responses to “TiP is misunderstood – perhaps DDQ is Better”

  1. Testing Bits – 1/11/15 – 1/17/15 | Testing Curator Blog Says:

    […] TiP is misunderstood – perhaps DDQ is Better – Seth Eliot – http://www.setheliot.com/blog/2015/01/12/tip-is-misunderstood-ddq-is-better/ […]

  2. Seth Eliot's Blog » Blog Archive » Dog bone approach to testing Says:

    […] (yeah, I went back to using TiP instead of DDQ…) […]

Leave a Reply